City Council Work Session Transcript – 3/19/2024 Title: ATXN-1 (24hr) Channel: 1 - ATXN-1 Recorded On: 3/19/2024 6:00:00 AM Original Air Date: 3/19/2024 Transcript Generated by SnapStream ================================== Please note that the following transcript is for reference purposes and does not constitute the official record of actions taken during the meeting. For the official record of actions of the meeting, please refer to the Approved Minutes. [8:59:45 AM] We are a-t-x-n the City of Austin's Government Access Channel everybody, it's 9:00 in the morning on Thursday, March 19th, 2024, and I will call to order the city council of Austin, Texas work session for this day. We are meeting in the city council chambers in Austin city hall, which is located at 301 west second street in Austin, Texas. We have a quorum of the city council present and so we will begin the work session. Members. What I thought we would do is on the briefings, I am [9:00:46 AM] do is on the briefings, I am told that item number b3 is a very short briefing, I'm told that by miss Hardin, so, we'll see how she does, now that she's told me that. And, so what I thought I would do so that so that staff on this item would be able to go back and do other things that they might need to do. We would call up b3 first and then go to b1 and then b2. So miss Hardin, the floor is yours. >> Conway harden with the planning department. I'm here to present this development assessment item. Case number C D 2023 0001. This is a briefing on a proposed plan unit development or pod pad, located at 505 ten south congress avenue, 105 west Riverside drive, in 407 and a half Haywood avenue. And so just as a quick reminder to council, the city's land development code requires that prior to an applicant submitting a pud [9:01:47 AM] applicant submitting a pud application, the applicant is required to do what we call a development assessment, which is essentially a dry run of what they are proposing to submit. Staff offers, comments and comments come from numerous city departments, and we give them back to the applicant. And then we give a briefing to council on some of the overall big picture items, in reference to what the applicant is going to submit in their future pud application. This is the time where you provide feedback to that proposal. As I stated, the site is located at 505 ten south congress avenue, 105 west Riverside drive, and 407 and a half Haywood avenue. The site is 6.0102 acres in size, and currently is developed with a two story office structure which is 105 Riverside drive, a multifamily use. South congress square apartments, a restaurant, egos, a five story office building. 510 south congress avenue and that are and those are zoned cs one, P and cs one, V and P. It is designated as [9:02:48 AM] V and P. It is designated as mixed use on the future land use map. Pflumm in the Bouldin creek neighborhood plan that was adopted in may of 2022. The property is located within the lady bird lake and east Boulder creek watersheds, which are classified as urban watershed and as part of the south central waterfront district. The property is located within the boundaries of the south central waterfront vision framework plan, which the long range planning division, the planning department, is currently in. The process of revising per council resolution. Again, the applicant is proposing pud and piece zoning. The proposed project will consist of a mixed use development of approximately 800 residential units, a 225 key hotel, 200,000ft S of office, 90,000ft S of retail use, 30,000ft S of restaurant use, and a 25,000 square foot grocery store. Much of the parking for the development will be achieved through below grade parking structures, as the majority of the site is seus one, which [9:03:48 AM] the site is seus one, which allows for 60ft in height. The cs one zoning district would be the baseline zoning district for the pud, so any development over the height of 60ft would have to comply with tier three of the ordinance, which allow outlines the affordability requirement the applicant is requesting 25 code modifications, which is outlined in exhibit F and a note. The applicant is requesting a maximum height of 575ft and a floor area ratio. Requests of 6.1121, which of course, the existing zoning of cs one does not allow an exchange for receiving the increase entitlements of height, fa and other modifications the applicant is seeking some of the applicants proposed superior superiority items are as follows. Providing for open space that is 10% above the minimum requirement that will result in a minimum of 100 linear feet along the trail along east Bouldin creek trail entrance to the development of south congress avenue to bring [9:04:49 AM] south congress avenue to bring users into the development through open space and along the restored creek. A minimum of 1000 linear feet of internal sidewalks, a minimum of 300 linear feet of bike paths, a minimum of 2000ft S of recreational courts and play spaces, a reduction in maximum permitted impervious cover by 5. Rainwater harvesting. Stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces that will be directed to landscaped areas equal to or greater than the required landscape area 5000ft S of commercial space to be provided for local businesses or nonprofits for lease at affordable rate for a period of 25 years. And again, there's other support superiority items listed on page two of the staff report in your backup, and also to note that this property is located near the future Orange and blue line. So council, just to know that once this briefing is complete, the applicant may submit their actual application. Then it will go through the usual process review by multiple city departments, review by a minimum of the environmental [9:05:50 AM] minimum of the environmental commission, planning commission and finally back to council. And that concludes my presentation. Please feel free to relay any comments at this time. >> Thank you, miss Hardin. Members, you got any questions or comments of miss Arden council member qadri, I'll recognize you. >> Great. Wish I could be there today and a little bit under the weather. I just have a few, comments and then some questions for the applicant, I think the development, gives us an immense opportunity, as a south central waterfront area, it looks like it's aligning to a lot of the vision, that's been laid out when it comes to sustainability, inclusivity and multi modes of mobility. We, we just want to make sure, you know, we should really make sure we get a lot of this. Right. So I have a few questions. If the applicant's in the room I can't tell if they are. But is the applicant there? >> Is here somebody just volunteering to ask answer questions? [9:06:52 AM] questions? >> Okay, well, I'm happy to ask, would you identify yourself for the record to answer your questions, well, my I think a few questions. First person is on, council member, on mobility. So I'm gonna I'm gonna ask it again, tell if they've walked up yet, but, could whoever's there, could they expand more on how the proposal would go above and beyond when it comes to multimodal mobility? >> Now, identify yourself, Mike Iannaccone, I'm an executive vice president with the related companies. >> Do you hear the question? >> Yeah. Could you repeat the question? >> Yeah, I can repeat it, could you just expand more on how the proposed the proposal would go above and beyond, when it comes to multimodal mobility. >> So in terms of multimodal mobility, obviously this is this site is directly adjacent to the rail line, so the project connect would be an important [9:07:53 AM] connect would be an important part of this project in addition, this is a, a sort of the heart of south congress. And when you're thinking about east west, traffic in terms of, bike and pedestrian, we're also planning a bike path and pedestrian path along the creek on the Bouldin creek side, in addition to bike, ped and scooter paths along Riverside and along south congress. >> Got it. >> And then, how have conversations around affordability been with staff? >> We continued to discuss, both with the south central waterfront committee and, and, as it relates to the pud, alternatives on affordable housing. >> Great. And then when it comes to, commercial retail component, or a venue, has that something that's been, considered, can you elaborate on that question, [9:08:57 AM] elaborate on that question, please? >> Yeah. >> I was just I was just asking if you if you've considered any affordable commercial retail component or venue, you know, I think would be it would help, keep what fuels Austin, you know, just the uniqueness of all that, like on on site. >> I believe in the pud filing, there's an allocation for, affordable retail for mwbe applicants. >> Okay, great. And then are there apartments on site? Sorry, the apartments that are on site. Are they are they currently vacant or are they, are they occupied? >> The apartments on the site? Are approximately 80% occupied. Okay >> And then I assume you guys have had a chance to talk to the to the tenants, we have the vast majority of the tenants are are new tenants. Post, our acquisition of the property. >> Okay, great. Okay those were, the questions I had. Oh, great. >> One second members. Anybody [9:09:57 AM] >> One second members. Anybody else have questions? Council member Ryan alter, the 800 residential units. >> That's all ownership or, no. A small portion of them would be for sale. And the vast majority of them would be for rent. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions? Comments? Thank you. Sir >> You're welcome. Thank you. >> If you're not actually involved with the project you did a good job answering questions. All right, miss harden, you got anything more? All right, everybody. She told me it's going to be three minutes. It was ten. But that's okay, we won't blame council member qadri at all for that, it'll all be on miss harden. No, thank you very much. Anybody else got anything on item b3? Councilmember qadri, thank you for your questions, members that will take us back to item number b1 on. And I'll recognize mister good. >> Morning, mayor and council. Robert. Good, assistant city manager. I'm going to do a real brief intro to this. Just to set [9:10:58 AM] brief intro to this. Just to set the stage for. Richard's going to remind you of the cap project. It's been a while. We've been before council in November of last year. We'll talk about the project components, the costs, funding deadlines, funding options, which have changed because of our successful $105 million grant that we received from the federal government. So we'll we'll talk about how that impacts the project. But mainly today we're here to talk about considering on Thursday, you have an agenda item to consider, a state infrastructure bank loan application. We had looked at that debt instrument before, but we had discarded that mainly because the amount of loan applications that have been given by txdot run in the 5 to $10 million range. Through our conversations with txdot, they encouraged us to think beyond that box, outside that box, and push the envelope. I wanted to make sure that I set expectations. This would, if we apply for 191 million, as our recommendation is, it's five times their normal highest bid, loan application award. So they [9:11:59 AM] loan application award. So they were encouraging us to stretch the envelope. We've taken that to heart, and we're really stretching the envelope. So they wanted to make sure you knew the expectations. Burns. That is a very high ask. And we may not get that number. But again, if we don't ask for it, we wouldn't get it for sure. The staff today will tell you why this is a good debt instrument for us, and why we encourage the council to consider this on your Thursday agenda. So with that, I'm going to turn it over to Richard, and he's going to run, remind you what the project is about, and then we'll get to Kim Olivares. We'll talk about the funding option and state infrastructure bank and ask answer any questions you may have. With that, I'll turn it over to Richard. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Mr. Good, good morning, mayor and council, Richard Mendoza, director of transportation and public works. I'm going to give a quick overview of the, the captain stitch project and, cover some of the cost and timelines, and then I'll be followed by deputy cfo Kim Olivares to talk, [9:13:00 AM] cfo Kim Olivares to talk, actually, about the mechanics of the state infrastructure bank and funding scenarios, so this is a review, but for our viewers out there, the txdot is lowering I-35. And so we have this opportunity to cap over the freeway and reclaim property, as well as reconnect communities in green on this map are depicted the city cap and stitch location burns in Orange depicts the university of Texas, plan caps, which are under separate discussion between UT and txdot and then in the far lower right you can see, purple. That's depicting the holly stitch, you may recall that last December, council approved us to enter into an advanced funding agreement with txdot for the 30% design of the city locations. As okay, the next following slides [9:14:01 AM] okay, the next following slides will cover the cost estimates and timelines for building the caps. But for ease of discussion, we have separated them into three distinct project elements the roadway, the tunnel cap, and the amenities. The roadway elements are needed to support any future overhead caps and include upgraded foundations walls. The lowered roadway themselves has hazardous material catchment concrete columns to support the deck cap. It's important to note that funding these components are needed to preserve our ability to cap in the future and future. Proof these improvements, in the future, the next component are the tunnel elements and the cap or lid itself. These consist of a tunnel support building that is located on the surface. The actual deck cap and ventilation jet fans and then finally the third component are the [9:15:03 AM] third component are the amenities. And these are what we actually will improve on top of the decks. And examples of these could be park space, open space, other light structures such as restrooms, pavilions, trees, public art and cultural facilities. So we'll talk about the cost estimates. I'm sorry, one slide over. So these are the project components and are illustrated here, and color coded. And so in wrote the in blue, we depict the roadway elements, the tunnel and cap elements are depicted in Orange. And then the amenities on top in green. And also for your reference, we show in solid black the baseline txdot project with no caps. And you can see that in order to accommodate caps, those columns need to be significantly deeper and wider. The roadway itself needs to be [9:16:03 AM] The roadway itself needs to be lowered to accommodate the clearance of the overhead, jet fans and those roadway elements. Again in the shaded blue, are what the city would need to commit to funding by the end of this year in order to preserve our ability to cap all of the locations. Okay, now we'll talk a little bit about cost estimates as well as some timelines. So these are the cost estimates for the city caps and we've also color coded them by each component and each element on the left that column are the actual cap sections. And across the top are the components with decision points needed, this secured funding line at the bottom was recently updated last week as, as you know, with the recent announcement of the award , to the city of Austin of 105 million neighborhood access and equity federal grant and that location that we applied for was [9:17:04 AM] location that we applied for was from Cesar Chavez to fourth avenue. And so the remaining need, first for design, is $19 million. This will get us to 100% design line for all of the proposed, cap and stitch locations. We have the 15 million secured and paid to txdot that you authorized in December. Next decision point is December 21st. And so that number 144, is reflective of the 30 million that we are receiving with that federal grant to apply to the roadway elements for the Cesar Chavez to fourth. And so the remaining, need and commitment to txdot is $144 million. That decision is needed by December 24th. And then for the deck costs themselves, these are the actual lids on top. Txdot does not need the decision for that until 2026. And that [9:18:05 AM] for that until 2026. And that remaining need also has been updated last week, and is 249 million for all the deck costs. And then I've also included some estimates for the improvements to amenities for both design and construction. So these would be for the improvements that we actually work with our community and decide to build on top of the cap deck, structures. This is the same slide, but we've added what we estimate could be the annual operations and maintenance costs, both for the structural elements, which txdot will require us to enter into a municipal maintenance agreement to maintain, as well as for potential amenities on top. The structures essentially are our response ability for those jet fans, for the fire suppression system and for the hazardous [9:19:07 AM] system and for the hazardous material catchment basin, as well as the tunnel support building. The amenities, operations and maintenance costs would be for any improvements that we place on top. Any buildings, any landscaping, any public, public spaces, as. Those will be recurring annually after approximately 2032, when txdot is fully completed. The capex central project and lowered the freeway. And now we're ready to come build on top. Some key text on deadlines, to share. Of course, we already reached the December 23rd first deadline from txdot to commit to 30% design, and that design is being initiated now with our staff and txdot, in December of 2024. That's they'll need a apha and funding for to complete that design 200, for those, design [9:20:08 AM] design 200, for those, design elements. And then of that, also the roadway elements funding, they need a commitment but not cash in hand by December, for which, cap locations that we intend to move forward again. Of that, 174 million shown here, we recently secured 30 million from the us department of transportation with that neighborhood access equities grant. And then in 2026, things really start rolling with the project. They're ready to go to construction, the roadway elements, actual payments will have to begin, to txdot as early as 26. In 2027, that's the deadline for final change orders to construct, whatever our, our city decides to move forward with in terms of roadway elements and cap, structures. [9:21:09 AM] elements and cap, structures. And they will do that under their contract with a change order in 2032, if we still have not, identified funding or made a decision, we can still move forward with the decision to cap they would secure an additional or they would do an additional contract for that. But that's our final decision point. If we're going to move forward, with construction of our cap and stitch programs, and obviously, you know, as time evolves, those construction costs, we could expect, to go up. And then finally, if we preserve, our ability to come back and cap at a later time but are not ready by the 27 and 32, dates, they've asked for a ten year moratorium on any additional construction on I-35 downtown. Once they finish their capex, project. So that would be our next [9:22:09 AM] that would be our next opportunity. Okay, so these are the funding options, for the cap and stitch program. And I'm going to hand this over to miss Olivares. >> Good morning. Council Kim Olivares, deputy cfo, we the landscape has continued to change in a good way when it comes to the cap and stitch. We've received that the $105 million grant that Richard mentioned, and we've continued to have really great conversations with txdot that help us in terms of shaping what funding options would be best for the various components of this project, previously we have talked a lot about tifia, the transportation, infrastructure, finance and innovation act loan. That's a mouthful, but we've talked about the tifia loan as being a good option since then. As we continue to explore it, we've actually determined it's not like it's not necessarily where we should be focusing, [9:23:11 AM] where we should be focusing, because it would require us to still go for a bond election. It's essentially private placement of debt, and we would have to do, go to the voters for that bond election. So, and the interest components are structured to the loan are actually not in our favor. We would get better interest rates just with our regular bond sales, as opposed to with the tifia, federal grants for infrastructure are absolutely, top of mind. We like I noted, we received the 105 million. We're continuing to go after additional grant funding, but, and then public improvement bonds are obviously a very viable source of funding, but will require us to go to the voters for that purpose. Now, the new kind of, guest to the party is the state infrastructure bank loan. We had looked at this cib loan previously, but the dollar amounts that they were rewarding were not exactly at levels that were just intriguing for us, since then, we've had some really positive conversations [9:24:12 AM] really positive conversations with folks at the state that indicate that it really could be a great option. And so you actually see on your agenda this week, a resolution to approve an application for an cib loan, the , the, the way they structure the interest rates for it is incredibly positive, it's basically in line with what we would be getting on the market because of our, our geo credit rating, and so we're, we're really excited to be working with txdot and the state going forward on, on this application process. And for the various funding opportunities it creates , so our very our focus right now is first is for certain is the infrastructure is that that base level. But we do need to continue to be thinking about the amenities and those operating expenses. Long terme. So tax increment financing is, is still on the table, but like I noted before, the landscape has changed in a good way. So but and it's continuing to change with the various funding [9:25:14 AM] change with the various funding sources coming to the table. So it will be smart for us to kind of step back and take a new, fresh look at what the tax increment financing capabilities for the area would be to make sure that we're, we're we're attacking that prospect with the best information possible, certificates of obligation, because there's a desire for us to be to preserve economic development, possibilities on these caps. We don't CEOs are not necessarily the best choice for the infrastructure, and the cap amenities, because you cannot use those CEOs for economic development purposes, so if we start using it for the base infrastructure, it would preclude us from doing the economic development on the caps later, the we'll continue to look at public private partnerships for those amenities and the operating as go, fees are definitely an option and o&m revenue, but it's I, I don't know that that's our where we should be putting all, all our eggs in one basket kind of a of [9:26:14 AM] eggs in one basket kind of a of a situation. And finally, philanthropy, philanthropy has been very successful in other cities that have utilized caps. So we'll definitely pursue that option here as well, hypothetical funding stack. So you've seen a slide like this before, we've updated it to, note where we've received grants. What we're looking at in terms of cib loans. Also, I've added in some date components to it, so again, it is hypothetical . This is not the exact final approved funding plan, but this is we're we're constantly tweaking and working to find where we could achieve this. The vision of this of this program, so you can see here we the and like Richard was noting with the various decision points by this coming December, we would need to be making final decisions on certain roadway elements. And that's where federal grants at cib loans are a significant component. And then by December of 26, we need to start making some big decisions in terms of [9:27:15 AM] some big decisions in terms of the cap, the decks, for construction of that, and again, federal grants continue to pursue that. Cib loans in combination with from the first phase of it, but this is where a bond election is, is a likely, component of it, and we've talked about doing a 2026 bond election. So this would coincide with that, cap amenities. These are all very, very rough numbers as well as the annual operating expenses. We haven't done a full design of those elements, so we'll continue to work down that path. But we recognize that one funding source is absolutely not going to solve all of this. There needs to be a very, a combination of sources that create that overall stack for us to achieve this vision, and it will require a lot of different, folks to be involved through federal, state, local, and private funds to make this happen. But with that federal grant and other hopes we have for future federal grants and the cib loan, it is a far more [9:28:16 AM] the cib loan, it is a far more positive, perspective we have on this overall program going forward. So I'm excited for that, and then with that, I'll turn it back to Richard. >> Yeah. Thank you. Kymberley just on the grant front, we do know that the us dot or us highway ministration will be putting a call out for another round of mega and infra grants, this summer. So those are the larger programs, and, we've already been advised by our consultant that we'd be good for us to reapply for those, this year. >> So this doesn't determine the outcome of grant, but I'll let the council and others know that, after we received the most recent 105 million, I received a very good phone call, a nice phone call from, the secretary of transportation congratulating us on receiving the 105 million and, making reference to the compelling vision of what we're [9:29:17 AM] compelling vision of what we're attempting to do here. So, we have the attention of folks, obviously, $105 million is tells you you have some attention, but, I'll just add that. >> Thank you, mayor. And so our recommendation given today is to apply for $191 million of state infrastructure bank loan, and this will be applied to the 100% design and construction of all the roadway elements. As well as the holly stitch and additionally, we recommend, funding with this loan. The deck for the cap at between 11th and 12th, which we heard very loudly from our community, is very desired. And so that that amount totals to $191 million. And, you know, that's really going outside the box as mister good said, but we feel we got a very strong, strong, application for [9:30:19 AM] strong, strong, application for that. So I did mention previously that txdot will be entering 100% design. They are going to need more design criteria from the city by this December. On what we plan to place on top of the caps to inform, that remaining 100% design and so I mean, this gets down to what Zones would we like? Trees. Where would we like to place buildings, amphitheaters, amenities and, you wouldn't think, but trees actually are, are pretty, pretty heavy. And it's not so much the weight as it is. The point loads. And so for them to move forward with 100% design, they need an idea of where and what that we intend to place on these caps. And so what our team has done is and this will have to be informed and engaged with a very strenuous public engagement process process, obviously. And so between now and October, [9:31:21 AM] so between now and October, we've laid out a framework for going out to our public throughout the city to help inform us what would they like to see on caps and stitches on I-35, central. And so this begins next month, where we develop baseline parameters, followed by public houses and a couple of series of one on ones with each council office. So we can hear directly from you, and your constituents, via your office. And so that, I believe, concludes the presentation and I'm available for any questions, council members, any questions or comments. >> Councilmember Vila, followed by councilmember Ryan alter. >> Would the roadway elements be a part of in that? In that one slide, you have the sections highlighted where in blue for [9:32:21 AM] highlighted where in blue for the city and in Orange for the UT caps, the other sections will not be capped like either today or in the future. And that's an that's a question. And in other words, are there any areas where we would put the base support in anticipation of future caps that are not highlighted on that chart. Place any roadway elements outside of buildings that can be built on the caps. >> Do we have any more kind of insight into. Because I saw that you're contemplating, I think it was $10 million for the ground leases for, you know, spots on the caps. Again, what size buildings and any sense of that at this point. >> So we'll know more specifically as we get community input. But right now we're working with txdot under the [9:33:22 AM] working with txdot under the premise, there'll be two, three stories max, 2 to 3 stories max. >> Correct. All right. Thank you. >> Followed by council member Fuentes. >> What is the timeline for the application for the infrastructure bank? Like what? So how fast do we get that determination? Sorry, sorry, yes . I mean, we've got the application drafted and it's ready to launch, upon your approval, we've been told it's about a six month process for processing that would put us about August. >> September? Right. What do we have a backup plan like? I'm looking at slide 11, and, you know, we've got $163 million in the decision by December 2024 column as a from the cib, if we either don't get the award or get a diminished award, or do we have a backup plan, just if we [9:34:23 AM] have a backup plan, just if we get less than the 191, we'll have to have additional conversations primarily around where we want to prioritize and move forward with the available funding that we have, I also understand that the mega and infra grant programs for highway projects is going. That call's going to come sooner than last year, and it's going to be facilitated, fairly quickly. So it's a dynamic. The funding, is a dynamic situation for us. >> I'm just trying to think of the options available if we get to October or to August, September, if the only option at that point available is something that requires voter approval, are we going to run up against timeline ins to do that? And so I just I want to make sure as we think about backup plans that we keep whatever contingencies in place and are, you know, thinking about the timeline or the deadlines involved. Correct. In that. And then on the, the tax increment [9:35:23 AM] then on the, the tax increment financing thing to achieve that, are we planning on setting up the zone now or soon to now? So that we can get the maximum gain so with the tax increment financing, I mean, there was some incredibly preliminary work done to just kind of look at very high level possibilities. >> But with the way the shifts in terms of where we're looking at caps and then the kind of the stitch we've we've had changes on that front, and then also what we're looking at in terms of the new land that is created, so there's been a lot of, there's been changes that require us to do some more detailed investigation and analysis to determine capabilities, financing capabilities for the area, so we would likely. I don't know, we could we could look into the [9:36:27 AM] could we could look into the possibility of establishing something this year, but, I'm just I'm not 100% confident that that's doable at this point. I think there's a lot more conversation that needs to take place, especially relative to the, the results of the cib loan application and what we're looking at in terms of, of are we sticking with what caps are proposing, or are we going to have to make changes because there's just we're just we're right. We're almost there of being able to have just the right amount of information to do something. And do it more meaningfully, but we're just not quite there yet. Okay. >> Yeah. All right. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you, Fuentes. >> Thank you. And thank you to our staff for today's presentation. I know this is very timely. Coming off the heels of $105 million federal grant award, so certainly this information is super relevant to us. You know, we know that this project, the expansion and renovation of I-35 is a generational project. And certainly if we're asking austinites to go through a decade of traffic delays and construction, we want to make [9:37:28 AM] construction, we want to make sure that we take the time to get it right. And especially for me, that means ensuring that we have as much covers and caps and stitches as possible, to have that reconnect for our communities and to have the available space and potential opportunities to make this an even better project. So some of the questions I have, to start with include I know that this recommendation includes the holly stitch, what happened to the other two stitches that we had previously considered? I think there was one on 31st. Correct. At 32nd and 51st. >> Correct. Yeah. So if you recall, in our conversations last December, when we brought forward an rca to enter to the apha to start 30% design, we talked about the proposed caps and proposed stitch locations, and we had conversation that perhaps stitches in of themselves don't create the [9:38:29 AM] themselves don't create the environment and the installation. If you will, from the lower, from the freeway underneath and a full cap does. And knowing that we were going to have, you know, funding, challenges to make these improvements, we talked about focusing our attention and resources on the caps to realize that potential. And then I believe, if I recall that towards the end of that conversation, there was a desire to retain on at least the holly stitch, because we had feedback from, that, that, that immediate community. And so we retained the holly stitch, focused our energies and attention on the remaining caps, and so that's, that's where the other ones fell off. Yeah >> And does this scenario, the recommendation that staff has laid out today that includes the stitch at Cesar Chavez as well, or is it so as Cesar Chavez is [9:39:31 AM] or is it so as Cesar Chavez is the beginning of the, federal grant award cap, but it extends from Cesar Chavez north to fourth. >> We want to retain what we're calling it an extension, not a stitch south of Cesar Chavez. So that does a couple of things, it helps with the design and placement of those ventilation fans. It's all going to be one cap, but I have a differentiated in the cost estimates as a Cesar Chavez south extension, because that was after we had applied for the grant and it was kind of making the math a little fuzzy. So, that one's, retained in there. >> It is. Okay. Yeah and then as far as you know, applying for this cib loan, the state infrastructure bank loan, are we taking into account or factoring in any administrative costs? Will we need additional personnel to help with the loan and finance arrangements? Has that been factored in? I'm not sure. [9:40:32 AM] sure. >> So fortunately we have staff that are incredibly capable, already of handling that. We actually have, within financial services, we have one of our deputy treasurers actually used to run this program. So we have inside baseball. Very good. Right on staff. So, I'm fully confident in our staff's capability to manage this for sure. >> Okay. Thank you. I just want to flag that because I know with the other large infrastructure projects, we find out after the fact that we didn't have the necessary staff, administratively for us to properly scale from, I mean, from the financial side of things, managing it, it's, we'll be incorporating this into our debt service rate. >> It's just it's like any of our, our our repayment, response abilities for bonds and the sort. So we're covered there, when it comes to the actual project administration, I would defer to Richard on on that. But from financial perspective, I think we're we're solid. >> Okay. And then I think, miss Olivares, real quick, just one question. More one more question [9:41:33 AM] question. More one more question for you. So the, on this slide, slide, slide 11, the hypothetical funding stack, this just to be super clear here for us to move forward with, with the menu of caps and to ensure that we are set up to have the conversation of having the other caps that are proposed that will include a bond election in 2026, that that is the most likely path. >> Yes. >> And last question on the prioritization of caps. You know, my colleagues, I know that as we see here that we have all these different financing mechanisms and there's a lot of variables and whether or not we get the loan, whether or not more federal funding comes in, and you know, wanting to adhere to the, the timelines that txdot has laid out for us, I would like to know from staff when specifically should we start having a conversation or how does it look like us having those deliberations of prioritization, prioritizing the caps and their construction so, council member, we'll be working [9:42:34 AM] council member, we'll be working with you closely through the remainder of this year as part of that community engagement, plan to get public input on not only which where the caps should be prioritized, but also what they want to see built on top. >> And so we've built in the schedule a couple of series of one on ones as well as public workshops. To go through that prioritization process. Yes. >> Thank you. Yes. >> Councilmember Ellis, thank you. >> Mayor, I have a couple of questions, is there currently evaluation being done for going back to the same federal grant application process for other caps and stitches? I know we were just successful with the $105 million for Cesar Chavez to fourth street. Can we continually go back to those buckets, or are they starting to be allocated to projects? >> So all that is part of the infrastructure investment, generating jobs act. >> And there's I think it's like a 4 or 5 year program. So [9:43:37 AM] a 4 or 5 year program. So they'll be recurring calls and notice of funding opportunities between now and 26. So we're definitely working with our intergovernmental relations office. And at every opportunity there is for federal application, we will be making that. And I'm I'm remembering, as you were, answering that question, I think they had spelled out over a number of years there were going to be allocating certain percentages of what congress had allocated. >> Is that correct? >> That's correct. Okay. That's still the plan. >> Okay. I appreciate that, do we know the standard interest rate for the cib loan that we're going to be applying for? >> So it's they base it off of your your geo credit rating. So in our cases where we have a triple a and a+ rating. So, and it's based off the MMD, there's standards in terms of the municipal interest rates, so it's basically on par with what we'd be getting on the market. So we're anticipating incredibly low interest rates, so it, it's, [9:44:37 AM] low interest rates, so it, it's, kind of a blessing kind of a situation. So I'm pretty excited for that one. I like that a blessing, and I forget which slide number it's on, but it looked like we were going to be expecting about $50 million per year for operations and maintenance of the amenities. Does that sound right? I know this is a really great, breakdown of all of the details. I just can't remember which slide it's on. >> And these are very rough estimates. Council member, as you can imagine. You know, we'll be informed what those amenities will be, but right now we've got it estimated at 34 million annual cost for maintenance of amenities and $15 million a year for those roadway elements, roadway elements. Okay, so that adds up to 50. Okay and I apologize. >> I'm going to back up on the 191 million for cib loans, that will not include the interest rate for repayment because we don't know what that is yet. [9:45:37 AM] don't know what that is yet. Correct okay. That sounds good. And then I was just making a mental note that if you actually look at I-35 on Google maps, it it has a name of monarch highway, which I think is really amazing. I know there's been a lot of work that txdot actually has done on making sure that monarch butterflies and other pollinators are not, you know, impacted as as roads get built, so as far as community benefits, amenities, you know, what do we want the tops of those highways to look like? I hope that we can pay a special mind to, you know, trying to get those trees in or picking lighter weight plants that can still achieve the same goal. I know we have another item on the agenda that, mayor pro tem pool has authored that I'm co-sponsoring, that is specifically around right of way and trees and trying to mitigate heat island effect. And so maybe we can find a way to incorporate pollinator gardens and other things that are going to, help our ecosystem in the long run. But to my colleagues, I know [9:46:38 AM] But to my colleagues, I know I've talked to council member qadri a little bit about the prioritization question that council member Fuentes had brought up. And so we may just all want to think on our own as they start this public engagement and getting our feedback of, you know, which ones we think are highest priority and if we need to phase them in over a number of years, you know, which ones are most important to do first. So we could probably start some of that work on our own, but certainly look forward to having that conversation, whether it's the full dais or, or the mobility committee moving forward. Thanks. Thank you. Thank council member Alison alter, followed by council member qadri. >> Good morning, this is very exciting and I really appreciate the presentation and congratulations to everyone involved in securing the federal grant, I had a couple of questions about the UT cap, I understand that goes through a different process, but can you speak to us a little bit about what they have planned and sort of the height and type and how it compares to what we're able [9:47:39 AM] it compares to what we're able to do and any estimates of costs that we have for that acreage, certainly. >> Council member, our team does meet with them periodically just to compare notes. I know they are probably about 8 to 10 months behind us. They've only just onboarded a design consultant, we've had one on board for, a little over a year. And, in terms of cost estimates, you know, outside of what's depicted in Orange, where all their potential cap locations are, we don't have anything further on that. >> What about the timetable that, txdot is offered to them? How does that compare to ours? >> I'm sorry, could you repeat that? How does the timetable that they're operating with from txdot compared to ours, that I would need to review with them? I don't have that information right now, I would be curious about that. And, you know, also in terms of the financial structuring of that, if they [9:48:39 AM] structuring of that, if they have, identified some additional waste, to fund caps that we might want to be looking at as well. And then for the, cip, funding, if you could please let those of us who know who are in campo, if it would be helpful for us to offer some kind of resolution at campo in support of the application, sure. That the other members of campo would be supportive of us going after this loan, and that might be helpful, in the application process to demonstrate that community, support across the region for it, so if you could let us know that if that would be helpful and help us with that, that would be great. >> Thank you. Council member. We will work on that right away. >> Thank you. And then I did have a question for miss Olivares on the cib loan, we have used a similar loan structure, I believe, for our water infrastructure for many years. It's allowed us to decrease our debt, over and over [9:49:40 AM] decrease our debt, over and over again, and was one of the reasons that we were for so long able to keep our water rates down. How does the cip process compare to that water? Fund. >> So are you referring to the Texas water development board funding? Yeah, so with the Texas water development board, funding, it's there's a lot more similarities to a debt issuance, for so it's a little bit more complicated. The cib loan, is actually a little bit more simplified, it's just a direct agreement with the state. So the cib is basically revolving loan fund. So the state is, adding funds to this, to this program, and they're continually recycling those same dollars year over year, to various projects. So, it is just a direct loan agreement. And then, there's will work out an amortization schedule. So it's, it's like, doing our, our bonds, but simpler, so it's actually a little bit easier than the water [9:50:44 AM] little bit easier than the water development board, as a result. >> And the savings comes from a reduction in the interest rate that we would be paying relative to what we would get on the market for the same amount. >> So there's not a savings per se. It's just it's, like they so the it'll basically be the triple a, interest rate on the MMD would, would be the same rate we'd be paying. Or if they go with our a+ it would be the triple a plus five basis points, so, it's there's just a set interest rate, a set direct loan agreement, set amortization schedule, we're able to negotiate directly with them as opposed to having to deal with brokers and dealers, and the sort like in a regular bond deal . >> And so we have access to this money, but we'd also have where does the savings come from then, which let's say I don't which savings. So I mean, this is just a way to get a loan. Yeah >> Yes. [9:51:45 AM] >> Yes. >> Yes. We still have to, you know, pay it off over time. It's not. It's just slightly I'm just trying to understand kind of the benefit of doing it this way versus the other, which is relevant if we don't receive the loan. >> And Richard just reminded me there are no closing costs for this. So if with a regular bond deal, you have cost of issuance. So there's the it costs money to make money kind of concept. In this case you don't. It's just your direct loan agreement and you're not in. And you start making your payments when you draw down on the loan, so it's just it's a much simpler situation. And now my boss is behind me, so I'll let him jump in, good morning, council Ed chief financial officer so there's not really a savings to this approach. The advantage is that the restrictions on this source of funding, compared to other sources of funding, are favorable to the city. We can, through using this loan to build the key infrastructure. We really would have no limitations on what we put on top of the caps. We could do parks, we could do economic development. So that's why the cib loan [9:52:46 AM] So that's why the cib loan process is more attractive to us. And some of our other debt options. >> Thank you. That's helpful. >> Walter Wright, council member qadri, followed by the mayor pro tem. >> All right. >> Thank you, mayor, and really appreciate the presentation, I have a few questions. One is more of a general question, and then I want to get into some ped bike crossings, questions. But my general question is, what part of these caps, is txdot going to be paying for? >> Okay. So in terms of the caps, the city is responsible for all costs, both engineering design, construction and then the ongoing maintenance. And this is no different than any other txdot highway project, where a municipality will come to them and seek betterment, and they'll enter those agreements and then record the, that, municipality to assume those costs. [9:53:47 AM] costs. >> Got it. >> And then, I appreciate that, and then my, my next set of questions, you know, I believe, you know, the least we can do is have a simple ped bike crossing south of holly and saint Ed's. You know, I think human safety, beats everything, quite frankly. And, you know, we've, unfortunately seen when we don't prioritize human safety. What would often happen. So I just wanted to know three questions on that, you know, question number one, is there a possibility to add south of the bridge? >> So we can definitely, have those conversations with txdot. We're having similar conversations. Council member at the 51st street bridge and, which they reconstructed, much like they just recently reconstruct the oltorf, crossing. They're amenable to adding some safety features for bike and ped, as well as some lightweight shade structures, [9:54:47 AM] lightweight shade structures, but at this moment, we're not anticipating moving forward with additional stitch locations south of the holly stitch. >> Got it. So you wouldn't be able to have any, potential cost estimate of that currently, the only cost estimate would be if we, like for the holly stitch roadway elements or like 9 to $10 million, but stitches cannot be phased. They would have to be done up front. >> Got it. And is this something I know you just said? It's not something being considered. Now but could this be added after construction? >> Just to add something to. And Richard, correct me if I'm wrong, but txdot is putting in the base their base stitch on all the crossings, so their their base stitch would accommodate bike and ped. It's when we go beyond that and I can't remember the dimension if you do Richard, if I think it is 30ft, if we go beyond that, it was the city's expense. So txdot [9:55:47 AM] was the city's expense. So txdot is already putting in an enhanced crossing on all their over on all their, bridges. So they'll be bike ped components on all the txdot crossings. One way to visualize those is while not exact, this is not. I want to be clear. I'm not giving an exact number. But if you visualize the Pflueger pedestrian bridge at, you know, roughly at Lamar over lady bird lake, that is roughly the width of the txdot stitches that it's doing already. Andy we're talking about the additions to the size of those stitches and or caps. Correct >> Councilmember. We'll work on that with txdot to ensure those bike and ped facilities are on their on their baseline stitches. >> Great. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Councilmember qadri, mayor pro tem, that's really good reminder about what [9:56:47 AM] really good reminder about what txdot is doing with the bike and ped crossings and, just to be reminded of that and to see where all those are going to be. >> The question I had was on interest rates for the various tools. Are those fixed or variable? >> Creekmur can you ask the question again? I'm sorry. >> Interest rates on the various different types of financial instruments that we're talking about. If we are, if we're buying, if we are using them and interest is attached, is it a fixed rate or does it fluctuate with the fed. >> We do a fixed rate, so and I've just been getting some additional information. And this connects back to Alice's question. With the cib loan and with our just our geo debt in general, a triple-a rating is ranging. The interest rate is ranging around three and a half to 3.25% right now. So incredibly low. I just the quality of our geo rating continues to be an incredibly [9:57:47 AM] continues to be an incredibly important factor for us when it comes to our financial planning, and so we're looking at an incredibly low interest rate for both any bond election as well as cib loan. So but it will be fixed. >> That's good news. And also a reminder to us to be really cautious with regard to our spending and our policies such that we ensure that we keep those bond ratings as high as possible as we possibly can, because when those shift and drop, then we will. We pay more in interest rates. Correct? Thank you. >> Thank you, members, I think that concludes everybody that had a comment or question, I will say as we as we conclude this briefing and thank you very much for a very thorough briefing, you can tell there's a lot of, anticipation with regard to this, I also want to say thank you to txdot because as Mr. Good, good pointed out at the very beginning, this they [9:58:49 AM] the very beginning, this they have signaled to us, a willingness to entertain a much bigger opportunity here that is consistent, I think, with having the kind of relationship that we want to have with the state government so that we can partner on projects like this. And I just want to say to them, thank you for taking that position. So with that, we'll now move to item number B two. And and manager I'll recognize you. >> Assistant manager Stephanie Hayden Howard is going to make the introduction to this and then, kymberley. Mcnealy is going to do the presentation. >> This should be a routine ten minute item. >> Good morning, Stephanie Hayden Howard assistant city manager. In 2018, the voters approved a bond, to provide an update to the Daughtery arts center. $28 million was approved. Our staff moved forward with community [9:59:50 AM] forward with community engagement, and we also received direction from council on this project. And from there, staff began to work on the project based on the feedback that we received. And after we started to put everything together, the project, increased by 30 over $30 million. So with that in mind, as we began to look at the project a little closer and started to evaluate where we would receive the additional over $30 million, we're coming back to you to provide an update of our recommendation. Burns, because we really need to be able to move this project forward using only the $28 million. So I will ask kymberley director Kimberly Mcnealy to come up and provide the presentation. Thank you. >> Good morning, council members [10:00:55 AM] >> Good morning, council members and mayor buddies off the dais, Kimberly Mcnealy serving as the parks and recreation director. So today's presentation will just give you a little bit of the project history, talk a little bit about the current conditions of the site. Talk a little bit about the project timeline and the challenges, and then it's a project recommendation at the end of this particular presentation. So the history of our project is that we were originally had $28 million for this particular project, and we, we, advertise this project as being a rebuild of the existing dac. So the Dougherty art center sitting right now on Barton springs road, moving that from Barton springs to the butler shores area, and I beg your pardon, to butler park area, which is actually behind the current, parks and recreation department headquarters and adjacent to the to the Zach Scott theater. And it talked about, having a very, replacing the existing the existing space, which would have [10:01:55 AM] existing space, which would have included a theater which is about 200 seats. It would have included a gallery about 2500ft S of a gallery, the school that is available there for after school programing and also adult programing, which included, wet classrooms. And by that it means that there would be areas for, things that need cleanup or clay to happen, and darkroom, a studio and then also some modest spaces for staff to be able to house 11 permanent staff and nine temporary employees. And we also asked for a lunchroom and a copy room to be able to eat and make copies of stuff Wright do administrative work. So it was a pretty modest, just a replacement of the facility, how we got to this Wright how we became aware that this was going to be the recommendation, is that the parks and recreation department started in 2010, where we had a feasibility study. I beg your pardon? Where we did a conditions assessment. [10:02:56 AM] we did a conditions assessment. And that conditions assessment reminded us that this is the space where the Dougherty is currently sits, is on a on a, a landfill, and it's in the 25 year floodplain and that it had some conditions about the building because the building is from 1974. So it had some plumbing issues and some mechanical issues and some roof issues. And then in 2012, between 2010 and 2018, we did receive $3.9 million via a bond program in 2012. However, at that time we tried to express that that amount of money was not going to be sufficient to be able to replace. And so we tried to be very fiscally responsible and set that money aside, except for $400,000 that we use to replace the roof. And we also at that time, between 2012 and 2018, we explored multiple options, multiple partnership options with aid. We applied looked at options, perhaps with [10:03:57 AM] looked at options, perhaps with Travis county. We looked at other city facilities. We looked at other pieces of property for sale, but ultimately ended up where we are, where the building is going to be, or where we propose that the building be built, today, in 2015, we did a feasibility study and we brought forward, multiple options as to where the building could be. And that's where we ended up with the with the site that we're proposing today. We explored with Ed and his team. We explored the p3 option in in 2016 and 2017, but because of the uniqueness of being on parkland, the public private partnerships model does not work for this piece of property because it is parkland property. I also wanted to just let you know that in this time, right after the bond was passed, we did advertise to the community that and we sent a memo to mayor and council and we said, hey, we want to let you know that we're [10:04:58 AM] want to let you know that we're going to use some of this bond money to fix the roof, because we know that we can't continue to have programing without the roof being fixed. However, we have really great news for you, city council. We are going to start an rfq in the spring time. We're going to go through the construction process and the and the engagement process and hopefully have this particular project on the ground in the fall of 2021 with substantial completion in the summer of 2023. That's what we advertised to you in 2018. So I don't have to tell you that it's 2024. So here's a little bit about that. Conditions is different. You I don't have to explain to the council that we're in 2024. Right. Or the public they might be listening, just so you know, the, the conditions assessment that we did that you saw on the first page, this is what it told us. It said, hey, you're in a floodplain and you have a lot of flood risks, just so that you [10:05:58 AM] flood risks, just so that you all know, and the public knows that building when we have, extra water, it does flood on a regular basis. We have an entire protocol for our emergency management to make sure that everyone is safe and to make sure that we protect the building to the extent possible, we have some Ada compliance constraints and we do make sure that we have appropriate accommodations, but it's not as Ada compliant as it could be, we have structural issues. The building is beginning to its foundation to sink a little bit into the into the landfill, which then means that we have plumbing issues. We have lead and asbestos issues. We do have a roof that was failing, but we fixed it and we have ceilings that have some of those issues because as the foundation isn't as sturdy, right, we know what goes along with that. The hvac is having some trouble and, the doors and windows, because the foundation is shifting a little bit. They also have their, their own, their own issues. And so we've been maintaining this structure, frankly, since 2010, because we became aware that the [10:06:59 AM] because we became aware that the structure was, having issues in 2010. So for the last 14 years, we've been we've been making it work, which means that I'm getting more and more anxious as time goes on. And that's about the reason why we're about to bring this recommendation forward, to move forward with the project, this is a little bit about the timeline, we did have community engagement in 2018, just as we had advertised in 2019. We brought forward, some information to the city council at that time and received direction, and that direction included that we would want to pursue per preserve open space. We want to explore shared infrastructure with our our adjacent landowners and by adjacent landowners. That meant the Zach Scott theater, also making sure that we were taking care of the butler. I beg your pardon? The ball fields that were, just adjacent to the butler field and that we were also taking a look at how the parks and recreation department headquarters could be incorporated, and that we needed to do a comprehensive traffic [10:08:00 AM] to do a comprehensive traffic demand management study. And it would be for the larger district area. We were also asked to provide parking and that any parking be structured and underground, and that should only be accessed from Riverside drive, this meant that we had to remove the surface parking, we had to also figure out how to make sure we were managing the use of the surface parking that Zach Scott theater had. And so we had to come up with ways that Zach could share some spaces we had to explore, or we were asked to explore alternative financing mechanisms, including the parking garage, a philanthropic interest, being able to see if there were other parking structures that were going up neighboring the in the area that could be used for this purpose, we looked into revenue finance, parking, transportation, demand management. We were directed to design for future phases and then we were directed to explore philanthropic interests, that was both the that was all the direction that we received in [10:09:02 AM] direction that we received in 2019. And then in 2021. I just want to go back to, I beg your pardon, 2022. I want to go back to 2021 and let you know that, the council at that time also was brought forward to options of how the building could sit on the land, and they selected a preferred option. And with that preferred option, it also added some additional expenses to the way that the building was sitting on the site. So please know that we did try to reiterate that all of the direction that was being provided would absolutely incur the costs of this particular program, and that we didn't have additional funding, although we were going to explore to the best of our ability, the options related to philanthropic. And we were also going to work with our partners in transportation. Ultimately, I'll talk a little bit about that. Neither of those worked, to our advantage. We also explored the issuance of debt. So certificates of [10:10:02 AM] debt. So certificates of obligation and the most that we have ever received in certificates of obligation, being as fiscally responsible as possible, was 3.3 million. And that was for a different project with the Nash Hernandez building. So asking for 30,000,000in certificates of obligation just was not feasible. Nor was we did. I believe it was fiscally responsible. And I believe Ed and his team agreed, hence that was not an option that we were able to continue to explore. So this slide right here helps to, show how the different direction that we provided increased the cost of the project. And so there is some escalating costs related to the actual construction. Right. So inflation supply chain issues, that was about a $6 million increase in, in the inflation or in the cost escalation. But it ultimately it's $30.65 million that this project exceeded the budget that we were given, [10:11:03 AM] budget that we were given, please know that there's a couple of challenges that I think I might have already talked about, but the council directed, expanded the scope, the it exceeded the budget. The alternative funding options didn't materialize. Guys, please know the friends of the Dougherty center are very, very committed to this project. However, there are grass roots and trying to raise a $30 million is just not something in their wheelhouse. Right? That's a lot of money, even for the our partners that are the best fundraising partners, a 30 million is a huge ask. And so as though as much as they are committed to this project, that just wasn't something that they were able to take on, we talked a little bit about the ten years of planning and design that that helps. Time is money for us, and construction. And so that added to this. And in December of 2022, there was the ask that we go ahead and build something. [10:12:03 AM] go ahead and build something. And I just want to bring this to your attention. We were asked to go ahead and build something. The council unanimously passed the resolution and then just ask for the funding. The additional funding needed in the 2024 bond. But we know that we're not able to have a 2024 bond and for me, my recommendation bringing forward is that it was very it makes me very anxious to build something because the entire design is predicated on a parking garage that is underneath. And so if we were to build something right now and wait until a future bond, we would have a cement building that was not usable at this particular point in time. We'd have to wait for the 2026 bond, and we're not sure if voters will vote for that bond. I mean, I hope that they will. Parks are important. I think that we have had a lot of support, but I can't count on something. It's an unknown and we would still have a building over at the Dougherty art center that we've been fixing over the number of years. That's beginning to fail [10:13:04 AM] years. That's beginning to fail in no place for the programs. And so that brings us to the recommendation, which is for the parks and recreation department, to work with the capital delivery services team to deliver a new dac facility using the money that we have. And with that money that we have, make sure we're designing in such a way that we could add phases and if we weren't able to meet all of the needs of the community for the Dougherty art center in a single design, that we would be able to ask for funding in 2026 or or bond programs beyond that. But we would have a usable space at the time when construction was completed with the with the original 28 million that we've received. So with that, I am here to tell you about the next steps that I am recommending, which is to inform our stakeholders and our community, obviously we came to you first, conduct additional community engagement to inform a redesign. And perhaps there's a possibility that we could use [10:14:06 AM] possibility that we could use some of the design that's already that's already been in our hands, that we already have available to us. We would complete another board and commission process, and then we would permit the project for construction. Ultimately again, the goal is to bring forward something that's usable so the community could immediately move programing from the Dougherty arts center, or at least a portion of it over into this new facility and be in a safe and welcoming location. And I am available for questions. >> Thank you for that, members questions, council member Alison alter. >> Good morning, thank you, director Mcneely. I know this is not the news that you wanted to deliver, this morning. And I appreciate your candor on this, given the items that we have on this week's agenda related to the Tokyo electron campus, I'm wondering to what extent we might also consider, pivoting on the location and I have no idea [10:15:07 AM] the location and I have no idea if that would be a good location. It just seems like it's an area that might be less constrained than where we are currently, placing the art center. And just wanted to ask if there could be some consideration of whether that location would be good or not. I have I don't have, you know, obviously you haven't done any, any, community engagement on that. And but there is a lot of land there. It would be right on , the project connect lines, in an area that would benefit from the art center being there, and it just might be less complicated and not require the underground garage. You might be able to, compare with, with, parking across, you know, city uses, for different times of day when the center would be more in use, that might be beneficial as well. So >> So, what I will tell you about my, the previous community engagement was that the individuals who enjoy going to the dac come from all over our, [10:16:09 AM] the dac come from all over our, our city. So they're north, south, east and west, and that the central the more central, the location, the more, more support that we received when we explored as far south as the Ann Richards school, we had some pushback, about that location being too far south for the individuals who were trying to come north when we looked, I'm going to say this out loud. And when we looked at the palm school as an option at one particular point in time in early 2016 or so, we had pushback about parking and the fact that it would be too congested downtown. When we looked at a location up north, just north of, I think it was, 3530 fifth street, it was a complex that had a office building that was for sale. We had pushback from the individuals down south. So I say all that to say, we could look at everything, but I can tell you the more central the [10:17:09 AM] you the more central the location, the more, the more that the community will be in support of that. Sometimes, though, I'm sure the community is in support of a brand new dac right now. So sometimes we have to make those tough decisions regardless. And so we will explore every and all option. >> Thank you. Council member. Any other council member Ryan alter the. >> As you look at rescoping, it seems just based on your slide about additional costs, it would seem to be underground parking would would almost have to be off the table. Is that a fair assessment? >> That is a fair assessment okay. >> And so if that element is removed and I'm looking also at the direction about the site design and constrained saints, you know, you eliminate those two things. That's 23 of your $30 million gap right there. I assume that's kind of the direction you're going to look [10:18:10 AM] direction you're going to look is to preserve as much building, usable building as you can and then figure out kind of what what right sizing needs to be done. Is that right? >> I believe, as I understand it, because I'm not an architect, but the team members who are engineers and architects, that you have to do a redesign because everything is predicated on on building on top of a foundation that is an underground garage. And so to the point that you're making some of the design elements, like the look and the things that people are very interested in, I believe can stay, but then the foundation setting and all of that will have to be retooled, which just gives us a chance to go back and check and say, is this what we want? Or do we want to shift it around a little bit since we don't have to predicate it on the underground garage, so some of the elements of the design, I think, might be able to be reused, but to the extent that it has to be completely recommitted and obviously re-engineered, that will take a little bit of time. >> And then once y'all do have that redesign, we all come back and I can't remember the [10:19:10 AM] and I can't remember the process, but likely yes. >> I apologize for being ignorant on that. We'll at least be giving you memos. This is not the last time you're going to hear from us. >> Okay? And I'm just curious how big is what we have planned? Like how many? >> About 4500ft S? No, 4000 45,000. 4500. We could have built that for 28,045,000. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Council member. Mayor pro tem, I just want to thank staff for your persistence in this process. >> I was actually on that bond committee back in 2012 that recommended that initial funding . So it has been a long time. It's a really important project. And I think ultimately, if we are able to make it happen with this revised approach, city manager, I think that would be a real plus for the city. And I thank staff, really for the diligence. >> I think we hear we hear what the council is saying. I think one of the things that we've tried to do with the capital delivery department that we've [10:20:11 AM] delivery department that we've created is to try to really design projects within the budget. That's allowed, and this project was allowed to escalate beyond beyond our means. And hence we've been, have a facility that's substandard and we haven't been able to get going. And so the only caution I have is if we come back with whatever this new look looks like, what I would want to caution the council is not to begin to redesign it from the dais. And then and then we end up having the, the, as they say in Spanish, el cuento de acabar, which means we'll just have the same story all over and over again. So we just want to keep from having that. >> Thank you. Manager okay members. That concludes all the items that we have, on the agenda for this, city council work session. Again, I also want to say thank you to staff. I didn't mean to abruptly cut that off, but, I appreciate you all. And on all of the all that's been presented today, since there's no other business to come before the city council at this, posted work session. [10:21:11 AM] this, posted work session. Without objection, we will adjourn the work session. It is still March 19th, 2024, and it's 10:21 A.M. Thanks, everybody